Mike Mearls comments on design

[PeterWeller]

Drill sergeant/cheerleader? It's definitely not a core D&D archetype, doesn't fit in an adventuring party.

Never read Dragonlance, huh? Tanis is nothing but a drill sergeant/cheerleader. Tanis is about as core D&D archetype as you can get.

Or are you, having joined in August this year

Oh snap, sorry internet veteran. What's next? You gonna tell us YOUR GIRLFRIEND agrees with you? Let me guess, this is all part of your elaborate plan to work us up. You're playing us like puppets in your masterful web. Listen chief, the only thing your post count is evidence of is that you need to get outside more.

 

[rounser]

Never read Dragonlance, huh? Tanis is nothing but a drill sergeant/cheerleader. Tanis is about as core D&D archetype as you can get.

Tanis would baulk at being called a "warlord". He's a fighter, and a friend, and the others look to him as their default decision maker (you can't just take a class for that, and others will tell you to pull your head in if you think it gives you the right to be party decision-maker based purely on crunch). He's not what you're implying - he's not a smidgen of being a drill sergeant, nor is he a cheerleader.

Tanis was fighting the dragonarmy warlords. In the REAL meaning of the term - proper warlords, warmongering villains with armies. Verminaard comes to mind. Yet another example of it being a bad name and archetype for the D&D core.

Oops, that example of yours backfired a bit, didn't it?

Oh snap, sorry internet veteran. What's next? You gonna tell us YOUR GIRLFRIEND agrees with you? Let me guess, this is all part of your elaborate plan to work us up. You're playing us like puppets in your masterful web. Listen chief, the only thing your post count is evidence of is that you need to get outside more.

August was the month 4E got announced, wasn't it? That's all that was meant. I'm not "drawing rank" as you seem to have assumed, because (as you snarkily point out), there is none to draw upon.

 

[PeterWeller]

Tanis would baulk at being called a "warlord". He's a fighter, and a friend, and the others look to him as their default decision maker. He's not what you're implying - he's not a smidgen of being a drill sergeant, nor is he a cheerleader.

Tanis was fighting the dragonarmy warlords. Verminaard comes to mind. Yet another example of it being a bad name and archetype for the D&D core.

Oops, that example of yours backfired a bit, didn't it?

Nope, you're just blind. Tanis is always dealing with the issue that he's the group's leader. He questions why they follow him, not realizing it's because he's an inspirational commander and has a good hand at tactics. He doesn't fight near as well as Caramon, Sturm, or Riverwind, but he's still a better fighter than a Bard would be. The only reason why Tanis was a fighter was because fighter was the closest match for what he did. Now we have Warlord, which is a closer match.

We can always go outside of D&D if you'd like: King Arthur, Odysseus, Fafrd and the Mouser at the end of their career, Faramir, Liu Bei, Guan Yu, etc.

Also, they were Dragon Highlords.

August was the month 4E got announced, wasn't it? That's all that was meant. I'm not "drawing rank" as you seem to have assumed, because (as you snarkily point out), there is none to draw upon.

Well, that's good.

 

[rounser]

Nope, you're just blind.

Nope, you're just engaging in wishful thinking and revisionism. He's about "which road do we take, where do we go next, Tanis", not "feather me yon oaf". The latter sounds like a Dragon Highlord talking about targeting Caramon with draconian archers.

Also, they were Dragon Highlords.

LOL

Yes, yes they were. But if you think "warlord" describes Tanis as well as it describes Verminaard, then that's rich. Very rich.

I don't know if it's possible to get the themes of the War of the Lance more backwards than you have just managed.

 

[PeterWeller]

LOL

Yes, yes they were. But if you think "warlord" describes Tanis as well as it describes Verminaard, then that's rich. Very rich.

I don't know if it's possible to get the themes of the War of the Lance more backwards than you have just managed.

Verminaard was a Cleric. That's his class because that's what describes his abilities. Tanis would be a 4E warlord because that's the class that best describes his abilities. The real world meaning of "warlord" has nothing to do with it, but since you're argument is based solely on the connotation of the word in the real world and not what it means in D&D terms, we'll just stop.

You really think that "guy who's good in a fight, but his real strength lies in his leadership and ability to inspire" isn't a common archetype in fantasy and adventure stories? That's what a D&D Warlord is.

Also, the theme that Good will triumph over Evil because it bickers amongst itself just a little less than Evil is pretty weak and has nothing to do with what we're talking about, but I'm glad you were able to get a LOL out of it.

 

[rounser]

The real world meaning of "warlord" has nothing to do with it, but since you're argument is based solely on the connotation of the word in the real world and not what it means in D&D terms, we'll just stop.

Yes, it's a bad choice of class name for core D&D. I'm glad your example highlighted that so readily, Dragonlance's War of the Lance really shows up what's wrong with it.

Also, the theme that Good will triumph over Evil because it bickers amongst itself just a little less than Evil is pretty weak and has nothing to do with what we're talking about, but I'm glad you were able to get a LOL out of it.

Yes, I read that in the prologue to DL Adventures too.

Here's another one: a group of friends can triumph over the warlords. To describe Tanis as a warlord is thematically backward.

 

[Belorin]

Isn't there a thread for this discussion?

Bel

 

[Simia Saturnalia]

I'm not actually sure there is an Internet Nerd Slapfight Thread.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

So, some people don't like the name Warlord.
I never liked that Paladins were a Core Class. It didn't reduce my enjoyment of the game (at least not noticeably).

So, the only interesting question on that specific topic is:
Does the archetype exemplified by the Warlord fit into a D&D game?

Well, I think it does. Feel free to disagree.

Personally, I'd like if the discussion went to other interesting topics discussed in Mike Mearls post. (Though it's possible that there is not much more to discuss)

 

[Umbran]

Oh snap, sorry internet veteran. What's next? You gonna tell us YOUR GIRLFRIEND agrees with you?

Hm. Deja vu?

Your snark is not appreciated. Do not bring it into this thread again.

Having said it twice, it should be abundantly clear that everyone should take the hint - keep it civil, keep it respectful. If you need, please review The Rules. Thanks, all!